As a guy who looks good in shorts I give the model guy low marks on his wardrobe. Horizontal stripes tucked into shorts with a tight waist are a mistake, even on lean bodies. He should go with a solid color and not tuck the shirt in. The long sleeves are fine in winter or on cool evenings year round.

Florida wrote:Getting them to put pants on isn't the end of the problem, Ann.

Pull your fucking pants up, holmes.

Sometimes it takes an extreme example of stupidity to put things in perspective and this is that example. Suddenly wearing shorts doesn't seem so bad.What is it with hip hop culture that they keep coming out with stupid fashion ideas. Before it was Kris Kross with the backwards clothing and now it's the pants falling down look. I like how, though his pants are falling down he still has a belt on, which makes this look doubly stupid. I also can't imagine it's easy to walk with your pants on your hips, but to each his own I guess.Here's an idea for the next dumb fashion idea. Pants around the ankles. And the pants are backwards. And underneath instead of underwear they wear shorts, which are backwards!

Not sure exactly what you mean, but there's a big difference between appreciating a guy who looks >ahem< "dapper"...

Maybe it's just my ex. She has a non-sexual infatuation with gay guys. This week she's in Gatlinburg, TN on vacation but has made sure to make an appointment with her gay hairdresser in Knoxville she used 20 years ago when we lived there. She pick a gay guy doing her hair over a woman any day. The actual quality of the cut doesn't seem to matter that much as her hair always looks the same.

When I was in college I took an acting class. There was one guy in there that all the girls were crazy about. I never realized it until several years later when I happened to see him in a different setting, but he was flaming. It's almost stereotypical how many women I've seen go non-sexually gaga over a gay guy.

BTW - do you know what the Castro district of San Fran is? I can clarify if you need. SBVOR had inspired me some.

I don't believe the commenters at the satorialist are real people. I think it's a couple of comedy writers. I don't want to share the world with anyone who would write those things seriously. I refuse to accept their existence.

I don't believe the commenters at the satorialist are real people. I think it's a couple of comedy writers. I don't want to share the world with anyone who would write those things seriously. I refuse to accept their existence.

Maybe I'm overly conspiratorial, but on the left there's an ad for american apparel and it keeps rotating everytime you update the ad, and the clothing on the guy looks very similar when it gets to the american male picture. He's wearing a striped shirt and long pants, but it looks like similar clothing. So my guess is, all the people saying how nice he looks are employees of the company and are merely shilling their clothes.

At the high school where I teach, there are boys whose pants are held up, it appears, by their private parts and by spreading their legs as they walk with an odd side-to-side waddle. This is compounded with the latest skinny jeans fad that prevents the boys from pulling up their pants; they can't because the pants are too tight at the bottoms to get them over their calves. As a result, their underwear is almost completely exposed when they sit at their desks. And they don't seem to understand the grossness of their underwear-to-chair contact when I ask them to pull up their pants. Curiously, there are girls on campus who've told me that they find the sagging look "sexy," but these are typically girls of lower ambition. Perhaps it's the attraction to the tough guys on campus, the rebels.

As someone here and on the Sartorialist site pointed out, these are British Army uniform shorts, and similar to other uniforms worn by manly military men in the tropics. There's a great essay in a collection of war literature edited by John Keegan, by a guy who posts to a Ghurka regiment in the Himalayas during British rule there, who describes in great detail his uniform, which includes shorts similar to this.

I'm glad to see these, as they always come to my mind as the refutation of the "guys look bad in shorts" position. Guys and girls look silly in short shorts. Guys especially look fantastic in longish shorts with thongs, no socks (which is what I bet this dude is wearing).

``... [These are] British Army uniform shorts, and similar to other uniforms worn by manly military men in the tropics.''

Thanks for pointing that out. Anyone else remember those WWII-era photos of Australian soldiers and (shortly thereafter) the Israeli soldiers of both sexes? All of 'em wearing shorts, and absolutely nothing girly about the men.

I don't know who Christina Hendricks is (and I'm not going to look just now), but I did enjoy Rialby's comment about that guy's picture.

Also, with regard to New York's observation that the comments on that website don't say anything, I'd disagree only to the extent that I appreciated the comment (by Claudia C. at 10:01 a.m.) which I interpreted (perhaps misinterpreted) as implicitly comparing that guy with Audrey Hepburn (though unlike said commenter, I didn't think it was "so cool!!!").

I mostly like the Sartorialist for his pictures of people on bicycles. As a bicycle rider, I need inspiration. Most of the bicycle riders here in central Florida fall into one of only two looks: 1. homeless person and 2. rider in the Tour de France.